In re Summit Hardware, Inc.
Decision Date | 19 April 1962 |
Docket Number | No. 14548.,14548. |
Parties | In the Matter of SUMMIT HARDWARE, INC., Bankrupt. John A. SCHWEMLER, Trustee in Bankruptcy, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Everett L. FOOTE, Defendant-Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Clair E. Whitmer, Akron, Ohio (Kent W. Woodward, Johnson, Whitmer & Sayre, Akron, Ohio, on the brief), for appellant.
Clarence W. May, Akron, Ohio (Brouse, McDowell, May, Bierce & Wortman, Akron, Ohio, on the brief), for appellee.
Before MILLER, Chief Judge, WEICK, Circuit Judge, and MAGRUDER, Senior Circuit Judge.
This case involves the question whether a factor's lien on inventory taken as security for the payment of a loan was valid under Ohio law as against the creditors of the bankrupt borrower.
The material facts, with one exception, were not in dispute.
The bankrupt, Summit Hardware, Inc., an Ohio corporation, was engaged in the business of selling hardware at retail. On December 17, 1957 it negotiated a loan from the factor, Everett L. Foote in the amount of $25,000 to finance its operations and pay creditors. The loan was evidenced by a promissory note executed by the bankrupt to the factor payable six months after date and bore interest of 5% per annum. The loan was secured by a chattel mortgage on certain of the bankrupt's fixtures and a factor's lien on its inventory. The loan was further secured by a pledge of the capital stock of the bankrupt owned by two of its principal officers. The pledge agreement provided that unless the note was paid within one year, Mr. Foote had the option to purchase one-half of the bankrupt's outstanding capital stock for $100.00. In the event the option was exercised, the full amount of the loan would then be payable twenty months after the date of the note and the bankrupt or its shareholders could then satisfy the note and repurchase the shares of stock for the total sum of $50,000.00.
No "Exhibit A" was attached to or made a part of the agreement.
The fact in dispute between the parties was whether written statements dated and signed by the bankrupt designating the merchandise upon which the lien shall attach had been furnished. Both the Referee in Bankruptcy and the District Court, however, found that no such statements had ever been furnished. We accept this finding of fact.
An involuntary petition in Bankruptcy was filed in the District Court against Summit Hardware, Inc. on September 25, 1958 which resulted in its adjudication as a bankrupt.
The trustee in bankruptcy filed a petition to sell the assets of the bankrupt. The factor filed an answer and cross-petition for reclamation. The trustee filed a reply thereto asserting that the factor's lien on inventory was invalid as to the creditors of the bankrupt because of failure to comply with the Ohio statutes creating the factor's lien.
The Referee in Bankruptcy adopted findings of fact and conclusions of law and held that the factor's lien was invalid.1 On review, the District Court reversed and held that the factor's lien was valid. 192 F.Supp. 489 (N.D., Ohio)
Whether the factor had a valid lien must be determined by the recording laws of Ohio. Holt v. Crucible Steel Co., 224 U.S. 262, 32 S.Ct. 414, 56 L.Ed. 756; Lewis v. Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, 275 F.2d 454, 457 (C.A.6) affirmed 364 U.S. 603, 81 S.Ct. 347, 5 L. Ed.2d 323.
The pertinent Ohio statutes providing for the factors lien are as follows:
No Ohio cases construing these statutes have been cited to us and we have found none.
The factor was not unknown at common law although he has been subjected to a metamorphosis by legislative enactments. Judge Hartshorne has stated in In re Tele-Tone Radio Corp., 133 F.Supp. 739, 746 (D.C.N.J., 1955) that: 2 See also, 35 C.J.S. Factors § 1, p. 496; 22 Am.Jur., Factors, § 2, pp. 307-308.
It was emphasized, however, that the common law factor's lien existed independently of any agreement. Judge Hartshorne added at...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Zara Constr., Inc. v. Belcastro
... ... Id. [at] 195, 97 N.E. [at] 373." In re Summit Hardware, Inc. , 302 F.2d 397, 401 (6th Cir. 1962). {34} The strict construction requirement was reaffirmed the Supreme Court of Ohio in C .C ... ...
-
Solomon v. Northwestern State Bank
...327 F.2d 720 (1964) ... Lewis E. SOLOMON, Trustee of the Estate of Northwood Millwork, Inc., a Corporation, Bankrupt, Appellant, ... NORTHWESTERN STATE BANK, Appellee ... No. 17297 ... A third reason is found in In Re Summit Hardware, Inc., 302 F.2d 397 (6th Cir.). In that case, the court said the records would serve to ... ...
-
National Acceptance Co. v. SOUTHWEST AUTOMOTIVE WARE., 26755.
... ... SOUTHWEST AUTOMOTIVE WAREHOUSE, INC., Defendant, ... Roy Bass, Trustee, etc., Defendant-Appellant ... No. 26755 ... United States ... Ed.2d 79 ... 410 F.2d 1141 The Trustee relies principally upon In re Summit Hardware Inc., 6 Cir. 1962, 302 F.2d 397, 96 A.L.R.2d 717, which construed the Ohio Factor's Lien ... ...